Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose between the Excise Commissioner of Karnataka and V. Sreekanta regarding the determination of seniority for the position of Inspector of Excise. The respondent, along with others, was initially appointed on January 17, 1968, on a temporary basis as a local candidate. Their services were regularised on October 26, 1971, under the Karnataka State Civil Services (Direct Recruitment to Class III posts) (Special) Rules, 1970. A provisional seniority list was published counting seniority from the date of regularisation, which led to the respondent filing a writ petition challenging this decision. The High Court initially directed the department to reconsider the seniority list, but upon re-publication, the seniority was again counted from the date of regularisation. The respondent's subsequent writ petition was dismissed by a Single Judge, who ruled that the seniority rules did not apply to local candidates until regularisation. However, the Division Bench of the High Court reversed this decision, stating that seniority should be counted from the date of initial appointment. The department appealed to the Supreme Court, which held that the respondent was not entitled to count his ad hoc appointment for seniority purposes, affirming that seniority should be reckoned from the date of regularisation under the special rules. The court referenced previous judgments that established that ad hoc appointments do not count towards seniority. The appeal was allowed, and the Division Bench's decision was set aside, reinstating the Single Judge's ruling.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Seniority Determination - Seniority of local candidates - Karnataka State Civil Services (Direct Recruitment to Class III posts) (Special) Rules, 1970, Rule 3 - The court held that the respondent's seniority should be counted from the date of regularisation and not from the date of initial ad hoc appointment, as the initial appointment was not made in accordance with the rules. The court emphasized that the service rendered prior to regularisation was considered ad hoc and not eligible for seniority (Paras 278-279).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the seniority of the respondent should be counted from the date of his initial ad hoc appointment or from the date of regularisation.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Division Bench's decision and affirming the Single Judge's ruling that seniority should be counted from the date of regularisation.
Law Points
- Seniority determination
- ad hoc appointment
- regularisation
- local candidates
- service rules compliance
